What is the test for a motion for non-suit?

For the sake of the non-suit motion I find that the plaintiff has established a prima facie case of negligent misrepresentation, in that it has put forward evidence which if believed, could allow the trier of fact to decide in its favour, considering the essentials features of an action for negligent misrepresentation as summarized in Queen v. Cognos Inc., 1993 CanLII 146 (SCC), [1993] S.C.J. No. 3, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 87.

Whether there was in fact a special relationship between the Province and the plaintiff regarding its crop insurance contract sufficient to make the Province liable is a matter for the trier of fact (see Allain v. New Brunswick, 2004 NBQB 311, [2004] N.B.J. No. 323 at para. 22). Therefore this is not a question to be decided on a motion for non-suit as I cannot at this point make a finding of fact.